I do not enter the suspicion of a conspiracy theory lightly, but whilst trying to contact one of the women I found my email to her being answered by someone already known for their involvement in trying to bring about the public ridicule of another prominent Indian.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Mason" <premanandpaul@> > wrote: > > ... and the stories have sounded no more clear as time has gone > > on. > > To me, and this is not universal, I knew or was on courses with most > of the people in SS. To me, most were credible as people. Different > than say, if SS were written by strangers, or worse, the top 10 > posters on FFL. And SS collaborated explicit things I had heard 25 > years earlier. Thus, SS files was perhaps more credible for me than > for you. > > > Now to assume MMY's 'guilt' on the basis of third-hand material > > is very faulty. > > Its odd, to me, how people wrap "extra stuff" around more simple > events. "Guilt" ? I know you use the term loosely, but there is no i) > legal, and most would argue no ii) moral crime here. It may be an iii) > ethical abuse (younger women) but I don't buy that. Jennifer was, > based on her attendance at my TTC the year before, and appearances, > probably 23-24 at the time of her "reading mail" to MMY. (Though she > was was probably not mistaken as 'the chosen one' as Tom apparently > thought he was). > > And she, while graceful and refined, IMO, is not someone I would have > termed as sheltered or naive. Demure perhaps. Adults do things, are > responsible for their choices -- even if they regret them later, and > are ill-effected by them. > > Perhaps it was iv) an abuse of power -- teacher / student -- I have > argued that in the past -- but have recanted some. When pants are > down, or dhotis and dresses on the floor, power dynamics may diminish > -- or reverse, wobble, and occilate -- who has power over whom when > nakedness befalls? > > So who (what crazy bastards :) ) is "assuming guilt" when, at least > IMO, guilt is a non-issue? A more corect rendering of your sentence > would be, IMO, " Now to assume the truth of the allegations on the > basis of third-hand material is very faulty. " > > Well, even then, there is a case being made by SS, see my comments > above on credible sources. But more importantly, even with credible > sources, i don't have terribly strong opinions that the stories are > true or not. I look at it, as many of the uncertainties in life, > probabilistically. > > Much more importantly, i don't have strong reactions one way or > another if SS is true or not. To me, the impact of the stories being > true is not large for me. I figure a yogi knows something more than me > about energy flows. And its his business. And even if not, i don't > walk out on other teachers and mentors because they banged a 24-yr old > attractive blonde. For some, I actually silently applaud. > > > So for me the problem I have with the 'Sexy Sadie' file is not about > > whether it has been published, just that it does not 'scan' well. > > Thats not a universal problem, thats a problem you have with them. > > > In > > fact many years ago I had the same feeling about Erik Von Daniken's > > books, and then I watched a documentary which took his claims apart ... > > So you have a history of problems in this area. > "very interesting..." :) > > > In the case of the allegations about MMYs sexuality it is not that I > > disbelieve all the claims made, > > Ok, a shift in positions? > > > just that I doubt MMY ever had actual > > sexual intercourse with a woman (however close he might have come). > > OK. So if he, naked, was about to have intercourse with a naked > willing 24-yrold participant, but didn't -- is that a huge distinction > for you compared to if he did? > > > Actually, for the record, I suspect > > "I suspect" are key words. Pure opinion, no fact. Much less persuasive > than the SS files. > > > that most if not all the material > > currently circulating about MMYs alleged sexuality has been put about > > solely to discredit MMY, > > haha. i smell a conspiracy theory. > > And your suspicions have little basis in the actual history of the > genesis of the files. > > > simple as that, a rather ramshackle attempt > > at cocking a snoot at him, rather than an orchestrated attack, but > > perhaps a mixture of both. > > Any other possblities? > > Perhaps to share information one found interesting? > > Perhaps to provide some material, which along wit h so much other > material, experiences, knowledge, allows others to make up their minds > on things? > To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/